this is the real question ^
strike offers a zero monthly payment option… the interest and the principal are paid at the end of the term… so interest is higher but if the bitcoin price goes up in that time… the borrow can roll it over paying the interest and principal of the old loan with the new one… then repeat if they’re lucky or just get rekt and loose their bitcoin if they’re are unlucky.
a significant change in the economy did occur.
- narrator voice
naw not just you the value provided by social media doesn’t seem high enough to justify the inconveniences of decentralization. i can only think of two decentralized tech systems that were actually better for their decentralization… torrents and bitcoin
there was a time when torrents were consistently faster than most centralized download options and still is sometimes (not as much anymore as cloud cdns and edge networks have helped speed up centralized large file sharing to match or exceed the speed that most users have with torrents).
final settlement with bitcoin after say 10 confirmations is still wayyy faster / cheaper than final international settlement of base money. like the time to send USD from your bank in Chicago to your bank in Rome and actually be able to spend that value … it takes a while to line up the relationships and even though the wire domestically can be sent and the swift internationally can be sent at the speed of light it takes 72 hours on a good week for the banks to actually finish processing things and settling the debit / credit actions that allow the bank to make the value available to you.
so there’s still a use case for torrents and bitcoin but i really don’t see if for decentralized social media. 90% of what is shared on social media can be ignored and people are generally better off for it.
is it really an improvement on mailing lists?
idk. people love centralized social media because of the centralization. it feels like the whole world is watching when you post and that you’re connected to the Zeitgeist when you scroll and see that 150k people liked this or 2m people watched that… most people get better impressions at their local pub than on nostr… so it’s not really good for that kind of global hive mind experience… and if it is just for niche communities … those are better served by niche centralized web servers and forums and mailing lists … why the decentralized theatre when social media always trends toward a hub and spoke of creators and followers. fewer creators and more followers … the creators become the point of centralization but those creators if they want more followers and want to be known and discovered would be better served by centralized world aggregation systems where there’s a chance they can blow up to be seen by billions of people.
if they want to remain niche… then why not just run your own centralized site for your community? it’ll be faster and more efficient? more catered to your specific fan base and niche community?
but then the nostr advocates will say… but what if the centralized provider rugs you? wouldn’t it be better to take your content and identity elsewhere where? maybe idk would love to see examples where this use case would actually be useful. i’m speaking as someone who was banned 5 times on twitter for posting npc memes back when jack dorsey was still ceo of twitter. it was trivial to create a new account and immediate find the same network of shitposters. the level of effort matched the level of content quality.
i just don’t think many people think managing a private key and dealing with a kind of clunky and variant fractured set of communities is worth the effort just to see some, albeit funny , shitposts and some decent shares from the few high value contributors (who also mostly post the same content to x too so why bother if you’ve already got x set up) sure x could rug everyone but until that happens … why migrate? when x rugs everyone then migrate with everyone and you keep the community… which is the part you care about.
i like nostr. but at least the social experience nostr provides is not what most people want right now. nostr could be great if someone shipped something genuinely useful … not just another twitter, microblogging app… or another buggy half baked clone of another centralized service that is a million times better.
can the devs do something? where is the not shitty github replacement? even make a not shitty 4chan replacement (really such a low bar), where is the not shitty signal replacement? even on the micro blogging apps… what are people even saying on here that would get them banned on X? nothing of consequence or worth the trouble they’ve taken from what i’ve seen. excellent you’re pepe meme has been signed by your private key and distributed to 50 relays lol cool? you could have just sent it in a group chat to the same five friends who saw your nostr post.
maybe we’re just early and i should check back in a few more years…
nostr right now seems like a circle jerk of people who love the idea of nostr (myself included) and are awkwardly pretending like they actually like it. zaps for example. it’s super cool that i can zap randos slivers of bitcoins for their reposted memes and shitposts. but do i find that it’s worth it to set up another lightning server with a different lightning address for my alts so i don’t have to reuse my main lightning node.. no i don’t. so i don’t as my main lightning address to my alts and i zap from external wallets or even my main nwc wallet if i’m lazy.
yeah it’s super cool but i struggle to convince anyone else why they should do it too if they are just in it for the tech and the idea of it.
maybe nostr was all along just the friends we made along the way
also only two people will see what you have to say… maybe.
-nostr
developers will be designers and designers developers. this has been a thing with UX developer roles for a while. now those roles will be viben for the most part.
let’s see his “in production”
https://blossom.primal.net/01902f7c13098ae28c5346565963561fb88fe81d27a4e7bd88cd49743aba1b1d.webp
There is a lot of nuance to the subject not captured in my summary. Perhaps the monks were offering free blessed rosaries and you could make a free will donation for them?
From magisterium.com:
The Church teaches that a blessing is a **sacramental** – a sacred sign instituted by the Church that prepares the faithful to receive the grace of the sacraments[^1]. Because a sacramental is a “spiritual thing” belonging to the treasury of God, the Church forbids any **exchange of it for a temporal price**. The sin of such an exchange is called **simony**.
### 1. Simony and the sale of spiritual goods
The Catechism defines simony as “the buying or selling of spiritual things”[^2]. The Church’s magisterial documents repeatedly condemn the practice of putting sacred objects or blessings up for sale:
* The Fourth Lateran Council (1215) expressly forbids “the sale of relics” and, by extension, any commercial traffic in sacred objects[^3].
* The same council also condemns “the selling of blessings, the ordination of clerics, the consecration of bishops” as a grave abuse[^4].
* The *Catholic Encyclopedia* on Simony states that it is “unlawful … to sell blessed rosaries or crucifixes”[^5].
* The *Enchiridion Symbolorum* (Dz 364) adds that anyone who acquires any “ecclesiastical sacrament, namely chrism or holy oil, the consecrations of altars or of churches” by money is to be marked with disgrace[^6].
Thus, **selling a blessed rosary, a crucifix, a holy water font, or any other object that has received a Church blessing is a simoniacal act**.
### 2. Can a priest sell a blessing?
A priest may bless an object **free of charge**. The *Directory on Popular Piety and the Liturgy* stresses that a blessing “is an authentic expression of faith in God, the giver of all good things” and that it must be given “without the appearance of a price”[^7]. The Code of Canon Law (Can. 1167 § 2) requires that the rites and formulas for sacramentals be observed “carefully” and that they are established **by the Apostolic See alone**, not for commercial profit[^8]. Therefore a priest who receives money **specifically for the act of blessing** commits simony; a modest donation offered voluntarily after a legitimate blessing is permissible, but the blessing itself cannot be sold.
### 3. Does a blessed item lose its blessing when sold?
The blessing itself **remains** on the object; the sacramental effect is not automatically nullified by a change of ownership. However, the Church teaches that the **spiritual benefit attached to the object** (such as an indulgence) can be lost when the object is sold. The Baltimore Catechism notes that “things lose the Indulgences attached to them … when they are sold”[^9]. The loss of an indulgence does not mean the object is no longer a blessed sacramental, but it does indicate that the commercial transaction is illicit and deprives the faithful of the attached spiritual benefit.
### 4. Practical implications for the faithful
* **Monks or laypersons who sell blessed rosaries** are acting illicitly; the transaction is simony and the sale is prohibited.
* **A blessed object may be freely given, loaned, or bequeathed** without any loss of its sacramental character. The faithful should receive such items as gifts, not as purchases.
* **If you acquire a blessed object**, you do not need to have it re‑blessed simply because it changed hands; the original blessing remains valid. Nonetheless, you should avoid any situation that makes the blessing appear to have been bought for profit.
### 5. Summary
The Church’s teaching is clear:
1. Blessings are sacramentals, belonging to the spiritual treasury of the Church.
2. Simony—selling or buying spiritual goods—is gravely sinful; it includes the sale of blessed objects.
3. Priests may not charge for a blessing; any such charge is simoniacal.
4. A blessed item does **not** lose its blessing when sold, but the act of selling is illicit and may cause the loss of any indulgence attached to the object.
Faithful Catholics are therefore called to receive and distribute blessed sacramentals **as gifts of charity**, not as commodities for profit, preserving the dignity of the Church’s sacramental economy.
[^1] [Catholic Encyclopedia Blessing](https://www.magisterium.com/docs/f2c979a8-871d-4f46-a059-320d3b837a76/ref/Blessing)
[^2] [CCC 2121](https://www.magisterium.com/docs/0583c069-d4bf-42dd-97de-c19f0b80150f/ref/2121)
[^3] [Instruction "Relics In The Church: Authenticity And Preservation" Part I - Article 25](https://www.magisterium.com/docs/89316f28-bc5a-4165-9a64-3838ca7ca7bd/ref/Part%20I%20-%20Article%2025)
[^4] [Fourth Council of the Lateran (1215 A.D.) 63](https://www.magisterium.com/docs/0b302a3b-0545-4e89-822f-386deadd2499/ref/63)
[^5] [Catholic Encyclopedia Simony](https://www.magisterium.com/docs/f2c979a8-871d-4f46-a059-320d3b837a76/ref/Simony)
[^6] [The Sources of Catholic Dogma (Enchiridion Symbolorum) 715](https://www.magisterium.com/docs/17f50f07-de81-4bf5-997c-f41ee830c033/ref/715)
[^7] [Directory on Popular Piety and the Liturgy: Principles and Guidelines 272](https://www.magisterium.com/docs/4fba701f-fda0-47a5-a2de-2e210d81f770/ref/272)
[^8] [Code of Canon Law 1167](https://www.magisterium.com/docs/927224e3-8c2d-44ed-a9fb-dc736030081d/ref/1167)
[^9] [A Catechism of Christian Doctrine (The Baltimore Catechism No. 3) 866](https://www.magisterium.com/docs/8b7bf85b-c327-43eb-8c2c-85f0272f6ae6/ref/866)
>Thus, **selling a blessed rosary, a crucifix, a holy water font, or any other object that has received a Church blessing is a simoniacal act**.
is this ai generated?
blessed items are sold all the time by churches and churchmen. A blessed item may be sold but only for its intrinsic value, not the value of its blessing. it’s not simony to sell a wooden rosary that happens to be blessed for the cost of the wood and to fund a monastery etc. to sell it at a certain price because it was blessed would be simony.
i think the above takeaway isn’t sufficiently nuanced.
maybe it’s the ‘for profit’ part. you certainly can’t sell it for more because it was blessed specifically… like a blessed category for extra and an unblessed category for cheaper… since that would be monetizing the blessing. i don’t think there is anything wrong with selling blessed items though.
if that is the case how do monks sell blessed rosaries, icons etc? i’ve seen plenty of monastery sites that mention that their items are blessed prior to shipping so people don’t get them reblessed.
kind of an evergreen statement. rejecting or accepting code being executed on hardware you own and run *may* subject you to legal or moral consequences always and everywhere.
i like subscribe. you don’t necessarily have to pay. plenty of people subscribe to free newsletters and updates from people and companies. subscribe to lists. subscribe to updates etc.
i think it’s because reddit makes up such a large portion of the training data —i’m always deleting emojis from generated code lol … should probably add that to my rules file like “you are a middle aged dev. you think emojis in code are cringe.”
people who don’t mind ordering a personal taxi for their burritos lol. i think the subsidies have run out for this business model and now their trying to actually make money. there are only some foods that work well for delivery and they have reasonable defaults. a pizza shop that has a pizza delivery driver that is on call during x hours and delivers to these zip codes. that works. but having a fleet of randos delivering within hour long drive zones and chaining together different restaurants and food times … it’s crazy and seems like a really bad idea. 🤷♂️
Testing things out here